Are You An "Operator" Of A Motor Vehicle?

Whether or not one is an ?¨operator?Æ engaged in ?¨operation of a motor vehicle upon the highways of [the] state?Æ contains at least three (3) terms that must be defined in the context of the jurisdiction being exercised not only over the ?¨person?Æ, but within the proper ?¨venue?Æ or ?¨nature of the action.?Æ In order to make a law, the Legislature? must define: (1) Subject matter jurisdiction ?± WHAT actively is being regulated; (2) Personal jurisdiction ?± WHO is being regulated; (3) Venue ?± WHERE it is being regulated, not only territorially, but in what NATURE of court the matter will be adjudicated.

The [traffic] citation always alleges (1) ?¨subject-matter jurisdiction, but never alleges (2) personal jurisdiction, or (3) venue. This is the basis for the challenge to jurisdiction.

Reading federal law (Title 18 [Sec. 31(6) and (10)], 23, and 49 [Sec. 313] of the United States Code) on this matter shows clearly that it is ?¨commercial activity?Æ that is being regulated (subject matter) by artificial persons (personal jurisdiction) in STATE courts (venue). But how can federal law possibly be adjudicated in a state court?

Via Article 1, Section 9, Congress can grant the states jurisdiction to regulate a federal activity. And this is what has occurred. Can you imagine traffic offenses adjudicated in FEDERAL courts? The Interstate Compact on Motor Vehicle Registration and on Driver??s Licensing is a grant of authority from the feds to the states. The state??s ADOPTION (not enaction) of the federal act is obfuscated by the manner in which the law is codified. You have to go back to the source acts of the state legislature in order to see this.

Also the Uniform Administrative Procedure Acts of the states show that regulations must be promulgated to ?¨affect substantive rights?Æ or to ?¨show general effect?Æ or the statute regulates only the government itself. Find me the regulations in your state to show WHO must get WHAT KIND of driver??s license. Show me the regulations in your state that show WHAT KIND of ?¨vehicles?Æ are to be registered.

However, if I aver (to assert positively; declare) this, I bear the burden of proof. Instead, force the state to bear the burden of proof.

The Plaintiff in a case avers (asserts positively), therefore, the burden of proof is upon the Plaintiff or Proponent to PROVE the averments or charges. Read v. Buffum, 79 Cal. 77; 21 Pac. 555; People v. Fairchild, 48 Mich. 31, 11 N.W. 773

If the state will not properly allege these elements, how can I prepare a meaningful defense?

Traffic is a COMMERCIAL term. When you get a traffic ticket, the police officer is alleging that you were engaged in commerce (transporting passengers and/or property for a fee, fare, or consideration, like a taxi cab driver or bus driver). However, if you know law, the officer has no proof and can never prove this in an open court of law!